While I understand the need for standing against big govt, I also think that rebelling against our govt goes against the scriptures....and if all these little groups begin to rebel like they plan, then all they will do is make our govt and our nation weaker against a bigger and more dangerous enemy....the Islamists.
Anyway, this is a rather interesting article on the subject of extremist groups, and thought it was worth sharing.

While I understand the need for standing against big govt, I also think that rebelling against our govt goes against the scriptures....and if all these little groups begin to rebel like they plan, then all they will do is make our govt and our nation weaker against a bigger and more dangerous enemy....the Islamists.
Anyway, this is a rather interesting article on the subject of extremist groups, and thought it was worth sharing.

I have a question, though. What exactly defines "rebelling against government?" Obviously, things like calling for armed revolt against the government would seem to qualify as "rebelling against government." However, people need to be aware that the overthrowing of corrupt government is actually advocated in the U.S. Constitution. I'm sure there are those that would say it doesn't refer to an armed revolt, but through more peaceful means like voting people out or something. Something tells me, however, that the people that wrote the Constitution, you know, people who were just fine with armed battle with England during the Revolutionary War, were quite ok with armed revolt against an American government deemed to be tyrannical to it's citizens. If those in government want to run things a certain way, but the system of government allows for it's citizens to vote, the results of which interfere with how those in government personally want things done, is that to be considered "rebelling against government?" :confused

Saved7

Jun 23rd 2011, 08:24 PM

I have a question, though. What exactly defines "rebelling against government?" Obviously, things like calling for armed revolt against the government would seem to qualify as "rebelling against government." However, people need to be aware that the overthrowing of corrupt government is actually advocated in the U.S. Constitution. I'm sure there are those that would say it doesn't refer to an armed revolt, but through more peaceful means like voting people out or something. Something tells me, however, that the people that wrote the Constitution, you know, people who were just fine with armed battle with England during the Revolutionary War, were quite ok with armed revolt against an American government deemed to be tyrannical to it's citizens. If those in government want to run things a certain way, but the system of government allows for it's citizens to vote, the results of which interfere with how those in government personally want things done, is that to be considered "rebelling against government?" :confused

You make some excellent points, in the first part of this.
However you have to keep in mind on the voting issue, that we can't vote on something that they won't allow to be voted on....it's the govt that puts it out there to be voted on. When they are not putting out the right ideas to be voted on we have to actually create a petition with enough signatures to create something that we actually want to vote on. The govt is usually the group that creates the ideas for us to vote on, and therefore, it's not like we are getting in their way, since only about half of the leaders want the thing voted in, the other half probably fought to keep the bill from even coming into existence for a vote in the first place. Besides that the voting system was created by the original govt to keep the govt in check, so voting isn't rebelling, it's participation.

howszat

Jun 28th 2011, 06:39 PM

Extremist groups have been around for a long time. When it was leftists who made threats against government in the 1960s, the FBI stopped them with great severity. Now that the extremists are rightist, the government is silent.

Wasn't it interesting how the extremists were so vocal when President Obama proposed health care reform, but how they got silent when the oil spill disaster took place. If it wasn't for the government intervening, the disaster would have been FAR worse. Many became silent when the government handed them many dollars to alleviate the misery caused by the incompetence of private industry - others were silenced when it was disclosed that some Tea Baggers have been collecting government monies in secret.

Same thing with all those fires in Arizona which is a hot bed of anti-government extremism. Note how the extremists there are silent today. Why? Because there is nobody else to help them with their problems. These people are radicals without any principles at all.

Amos_with_goats

Jun 29th 2011, 12:30 AM

I am an extremist.... :o

... I am no threat to the government though (unless praying for them counts). :pray:

Warrior4God

Jun 29th 2011, 03:11 PM

I think that if extremist groups are increasing in number it's because more and more people are growing discontent with the corruption and incompetence that many in government are guilty of. I'm not advocating for anarchy, since that would be far worse than the situation we have now, but I can certainly understand the frustration many people feel, as I feel it myself. However, the hard and simple truth is that government is run by fallen mankind. Therefore, no human government can run things flawlessly. Some governments may be more fair and just than others, but all have their downsides. If God was running things it would be much better.

Caleb

Jun 29th 2011, 06:36 PM

I have a question, though. What exactly defines "rebelling against government?" Obviously, things like calling for armed revolt against the government would seem to qualify as "rebelling against government." However, people need to be aware that the overthrowing of corrupt government is actually advocated in the U.S. Constitution. I'm sure there are those that would say it doesn't refer to an armed revolt, but through more peaceful means like voting people out or something. Something tells me, however, that the people that wrote the Constitution, you know, people who were just fine with armed battle with England during the Revolutionary War, were quite ok with armed revolt against an American government deemed to be tyrannical to it's citizens. If those in government want to run things a certain way, but the system of government allows for it's citizens to vote, the results of which interfere with how those in government personally want things done, is that to be considered "rebelling against government?" :confused

Isn't rebelling being disobedient?

If the government says do this, and you don't do it, then you have rebelled.
If the government says don't do that, and you do it, then you have rebelled

Surely when we are told to obey governments and authorities, it would mean the present governments and authorities, not some historic ones.

Reynolds357

Jun 29th 2011, 06:52 PM

I think that if extremist groups are increasing in number it's because more and more people are growing discontent with the corruption and incompetence that many in government are guilty of. I'm not advocating for anarchy, since that would be far worse than the situation we have now, but I can certainly understand the frustration many people feel, as I feel it myself. However, the hard and simple truth is that government is run by fallen mankind. Therefore, no human government can run things flawlessly. Some governments may be more fair and just than others, but all have their downsides. If God was running things it would be much better.

The fact is that the Federal Govt. has trampled the Constitution of The United States and has trampled the rights of the States.
You must keep in mind that the revolutionists that founded this nation were viewed by England the same way you view "extremists" and "terrorists."

Warrior4God

Jun 29th 2011, 07:38 PM

Isn't rebelling being disobedient?

If the government says do this, and you don't do it, then you have rebelled.
If the government says don't do that, and you do it, then you have rebelled

Surely when we are told to obey governments and authorities, it would mean the present governments and authorities, not some historic ones.

What I was getting at is if, say, a president, governor, etc., personally wanted a law to be enacted or had an opinion about how some initiative should either pass or not pass and made their views plainly known, but the voters are the ones that get to determine if the law or initiative passes, does God see it as you "rebelling against the government" if you vote opposite of what you know the president, governor, etc., personally wanted? In other words, am I obligated to vote how those in office want me to vote or do I get to make my own decision? The last time I checked, the United States was a democratic republic made of the people, by the people, and for the people, as opposed to a dictatorship or monarchy.

Caleb

Jun 29th 2011, 08:22 PM

What I was getting at is if, say, a president, governor, etc., personally wanted a law to be enacted or had an opinion about how some initiative should either pass or not pass and made their views plainly known, but the voters are the ones that get to determine if the law or initiative passes, does God see it as you "rebelling against the government" if you vote opposite of what you know the president, governor, etc., personally wanted? In other words, am I obligated to vote how those in office want me to vote or do I get to make my own decision? The last time I checked, the United States was a democratic republic made of the people, by the people, and for the people, as opposed to a dictatorship or monarchy.

You may recall that my view is that Christian ought not to vote, but that is in another thread.

If you do vote, then surely you vote for who to govern.
Is it the people who govern through some puppets, or the government who govern?

If your excuse to rebel is through the secular vehicle of democracy, then doesn't the opposition have to be from the majority of the people, and not some pocket minority?

Warrior4God

Jun 29th 2011, 08:32 PM

You may recall that my view is that Christian ought not to vote, but that is in another thread.

If you do vote, then surely you vote for who to govern.
Is it the people who govern through some puppets, or the government who govern?

If your excuse to rebel is through the secular vehicle of democracy, then doesn't the opposition have to be from the majority of the people, and not some pocket minority?

Well, your view that Christians shouldn't vote is a different topic. Even if every Christian didn't vote, there are plenty of non Christians who do. That's the good thing about the United States. It isn't a dictatorship. The citizens get to, at times, decide how the government does things. If that makes those in government "puppets" in your opinion, so be it. :2cents: The way I see it, since I don't live under a dictatorship, not yet anyway, I don't have to let the government totally screw me over. Just partially. :lol:

keck553

Jun 29th 2011, 08:58 PM

While I understand the need for standing against big govt, I also think that rebelling against our govt goes against the scriptures

Then I suggest repenting to the crown of England and becoming her subject again.

Caleb

Jun 29th 2011, 09:20 PM

[/B]Then I suggest repenting to the crown of England and becoming her subject again.

Are you saying that it is right to rebel against the government?

Warrior4God

Jun 29th 2011, 11:02 PM

Are you saying that it is right to rebel against the government?

I think it depends on what you mean by "rebel." If you mean things like not paying your taxes or refusing to obey laws that you just don't like but are not in contrast to biblical principles, then, no, we shouldn't be doings like that. If you mean things like lawmakers making laws that are not fair and citizens having the ability to create initiatives that overturn one of these lousy laws, then no, that's not rebellion. That's called "democracy." You may be comfortable with government corruption, incompetence, and oppression. Not all of us are. I, for one, am glad I live in a country that doesn't allow the government to totally have me by the gonads. ;)

Warrior4God

Jun 29th 2011, 11:09 PM

Is it the people who govern through some puppets, or the government who govern?

In the United States, it's a democratic republic. This means the citizens do have some say, at times, what laws are made. It's not just elect some people and let them make all the decisions for you, even if they are totally oppressive and unfair decisions. Our form of government was intentionally set up to include citizen participation. It was so that the government couldn't become a total dictatorship. If you have a preference for no citizen involvement in government I suggest you move somewhere that runs things by dictatorship or monarchy. I'll stay in the United States, with my right to vote, thank you. :2cents:

bdh

Jun 29th 2011, 11:11 PM

While I understand the need for standing against big govt, I also think that rebelling against our govt goes against the scriptures....and if all these little groups begin to rebel like they plan, then all they will do is make our govt and our nation weaker against a bigger and more dangerous enemy....the Islamists.

I don't think the one naturally follows from the other. Governments -- all governments -- need strong opposition to keep them on track and more-or-less honest. The fact that most governments are rotten to the core with corruption and under the spell of big business seems to tell the story opposition is not strong enough and needs to be ramped up more.

I'm aware of the Biblical principle of governments being appointed by God. However, they are run by men and, it seems, are more often wrong than right. Just as much as we are to obey, so to should we resist the things they do that run contrary to Christian principles. If one has a choice between civil disobedience and obedience to God, I think the choice is clear.

keck553

Jun 29th 2011, 11:49 PM

Are you saying that it is right to rebel against the government?

I am saying that I took an oath before God to protect the constittion as it stands, and that oath prohibits me to abide in corruption in government. That same constitution demands that I always be prepared, to understand the mechanism of legal redress contained in within it. I am also required to respond in a reasonable manner upon the revocation, curltailment or nullification of any right extended in the bill of rights.

That is my sworn duty.

Bandit

Jun 30th 2011, 12:10 AM

Are you saying that it is right to rebel against the government?

Please read the Declaration of Independence, which I believe is a far more fundamental document than the Constitution.

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 12:11 AM

I am saying that I took an oath before God to protect the constittion as it stands, and that oath prohibits me to abide in corruption in government. That same constitution demands that I always be prepared, to understand the mechanism of legal redress contained in within it. I am also required to respond in a reasonable manner upon the revocation, curltailment or nullification of any right extended in the bill of rights.

That is my sworn duty.

Ah right!
So, God's command for us to obey the governments and authorities, takes second place if you took an oath to protect a secular constitution?

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 12:16 AM

Please read the Declaration of Independence, which I believe is a far more fundamental document than the Constitution.

With respect Bandit, I don't need to or wish to.
God tells us to obey the governments and authorities, and I don't see any small print get out clauses.

howszat

Jun 30th 2011, 12:41 AM

You must keep in mind that the revolutionists that founded this nation were viewed by England the same way you view "extremists" and "terrorists."

Except that government was imposed on our Founding Fathers. Today, government is elected and provides annual voting to alter the government. Therefore, extremism and terrorism today is inexcusable.

Bandit

Jun 30th 2011, 01:00 AM

With respect Bandit, I don't need to or wish to.
God tells us to obey the governments and authorities, and I don't see any small print get out clauses.

So would you have been a good German or a bad German during WWII? Bonhoffer was a bad German according to the Nazi government, but he was a good German according to Christian principles.

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 01:50 AM

Are you saying that it is right to rebel against the government?
Even though I have no intention of doing it, according to our founders; Yes, it is our duty to rebel against the govt. when it becomes a tyrant.

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 01:52 AM

Ah right!
So, God's command for us to obey the governments and authorities, takes second place if you took an oath to protect a secular constitution?
That secular constitution is our government. That means that upholding it is following the command of God to render to Caesar.

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 01:54 AM

With respect Bandit, I don't need to or wish to.
God tells us to obey the governments and authorities, and I don't see any small print get out clauses.
If you read the Declaration, you might better understand what our Government truly is. You might also better understand what being a good citizen is.

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 01:55 AM

So would you have been a good German or a bad German during WWII? Bonhoffer was a bad German according to the Nazi government, but he was a good German according to Christian principles.
Caleb most definitely would have loaded Jews into gas chambers. Afterall, we must be obedient to government. If not, we are being rebels against God.:lol:

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 02:18 PM

So would you have been a good German or a bad German during WWII? Bonhoffer was a bad German according to the Nazi government, but he was a good German according to Christian principles.

Why the silly question?

How many Christians plotted to assassinate Nero or any other tyrant?

The governments and authorities are God's servant

We have to obey them as commanded to do so.
Obviously, we are not going to obey a command by the servant, to commit a sin or defy a command by God, who is the higher authority.

If you are employed, and your boss tells you to do ABC, but a supervisor (who has higher authority than you) tells you to ignore the ABC what the boss (who is a higher authority than the supervisor) said to do, you are not being rebellious for not obeying the supervisor, because you are obeying the higher authority.

Peter and John were told by God to preach the gospel, but the authorities told then to stop preaching the gospel.
Were they being rebellious? No, because they were obeying the highest authority.

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 02:19 PM

Caleb most definitely would have loaded Jews into gas chambers. Afterall, we must be obedient to government. If not, we are being rebels against God.:lol:

How very stupid

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 02:34 PM

How very stupid

According to you, you must be obedient to your govt. or you are sinning against God.

Warrior4God

Jun 30th 2011, 03:05 PM

Caleb most definitely would have loaded Jews into gas chambers. Afterall, we must be obedient to government. If not, we are being rebels against God.:lol:

I think it's possible to take the "obey the authorities" commandment in scripture too far and I think a case can be made that there is a point at which we are not to obey the authorities over us. This situation, in my opinion, would definitely qualify for an exemption to obey the government. :2cents:

Reynolds357

Jun 30th 2011, 05:02 PM

I think it's possible to take the "obey the authorities" commandment in scripture too far and I think a case can be made that there is a point at which we are not to obey the authorities over us. This situation, in my opinion, would definitely qualify for an exemption to obey the government. :2cents:\

God either ordains govt. or He does not. You can't have it both ways.

keck553

Jun 30th 2011, 05:37 PM

Ah right!
So, God's command for us to obey the governments and authorities, takes second place if you took an oath to protect a secular constitution?

Would you have been found innocent or guilty if you found yourself under the authority of Adolf Hitler? What would have been your plea at Nurenburg?

Warrior4God

Jun 30th 2011, 05:39 PM

\

God either ordains govt. or He does not. You can't have it both ways.

He does, but scripture also makes clear that if God's standards and commandments conflict with what your government says to do, God wins.

keck553

Jun 30th 2011, 05:41 PM

\

God either ordains govt. or He does not. You can't have it both ways.

Yes, He does. And when our forefathers rebelled against England and prevailed, God ordained this government. Until it becomes corrupt to the core, then God will ordain the victors of the next insurrection.

JUST LIKE HE DID AT THE FALL OF ROME. At the FALL of Nazi Germany. At the FALL of Tojo. At the FALL of Mussolini. etc. etc.

A little common sense is a gift from God. Let's not abuse it.

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 09:27 PM

Yes, He does. And when our forefathers rebelled against England and prevailed, God ordained this government. Until it becomes corrupt to the core, then God will ordain the victors of the next insurrection.

JUST LIKE HE DID AT THE FALL OF ROME. At the FALL of Nazi Germany. At the FALL of Tojo. At the FALL of Mussolini. etc. etc.

A little common sense is a gift from God. Let's not abuse it.

I don't quite follow how a government has to obey a government (let alone a foreign government)
Are they not of equal in office?

(imho) it is about not usurping a higher authority, like a woman ought not to usurp the man.
The body of Christ ought not usurp the Head of the Body

Man should not usurp the authority of angels.

Ultimately we have to always obey the highest authority being God

Bandit

Jun 30th 2011, 10:23 PM

So would you have been a good German or a bad German during WWII? Bonhoffer was a bad German according to the Nazi government, but he was a good German according to Christian principles.

Why the silly question?

How many Christians plotted to assassinate Nero or any other tyrant?

The governments and authorities are God's servant

...

Actually, it is not so silly. Bonhoffer was a passivist. Then he had a real struggle with whether or not to get involved with assasination attempts againt Hitler; but in the end, he decided that killing Hitler would save far more lives in the long run.

...
Ultimately we have to always obey the highest authority being God

And that is the point. There often comes a time when a person must decide whether the "government" is so far out of line that it no longer merits their support. So how many millions did the nazis kill? And how many more millions has the US killed in the name of abortion rights? At some point, the scales tip and Christians must take their proper (God-centered) stand.

keck553

Jun 30th 2011, 10:35 PM

I don't quite follow how a government has to obey a government (let alone a foreign government)
Are they not of equal in office?

What do you mean? The US Government was not a government when it rebelled against Britian. Rome was destroyed by insurgents (basically).

If the Germans would have rose up against the Facist regime, 40 million lives would have been spared. Do you think God would rather have the German people abide in Hitler and allow for 40 million deaths as history records, or perhaps He would have condoned an uprising against a satanic government. I think a vast generation of Germans are responsible for the atrocity they allowed by ignoring the racist machinations of the facist regime.

Same for Japan. Religion taught them to abide in a corrupt and murderous government. Do you think God condoned that, or do you think God could condone an insurrection that would have prevented millions upon millions of horror and death?

(imho) it is about not usurping a higher authority, like a woman ought not to usurp the man.
The body of Christ ought not usurp the Head of the Body

Man should not usurp the authority of angels.

Ultimately we have to always obey the highest authority being God

Well, the issue is that the "higher authority" in this nation that I am bound to is the constitution. When leaders disobey the constiution, it is THEM who are usurping a higher authority, then it is MY DUTY to obey the higher authority, which in this nation are the founding documents, and is defined as such. That is what I was ordered to protect under oath. God says do not make oaths lightly, and he means what He says. So here it is. My authority in regards to government authority is a document I am bound to protect. It is above any elected official.

So, if I am to obey in spirit and in deed..what is it.... Romans 8?....then technically I am bound to obey the highest authority of this nation. In Rome it was Nero or whatever Ceasar sat on the throne. In this country it is the constitution that is thei highest authority. I believe I am Biblically bound to obey the highest authority of the civil government, which is....the covenant of the consitution. So if I rise up against a government that disobeys it's own mandated document, then it is them who are rebelling against the instution, and I believe I am obedient to the institution by holding those usurpers accountable.

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 11:23 PM

What do you mean? The US Government was not a government when it rebelled against Britian. Rome was destroyed by insurgents (basically).

If the Germans would have rose up against the Facist regime, 40 million lives would have been spared. Do you think God would rather have the German people abide in Hitler and allow for 40 million deaths as history records, or perhaps He would have condoned an uprising against a satanic government. I think a vast generation of Germans are responsible for the atrocity they allowed by ignoring the racist machinations of the facist regime.

Same for Japan. Religion taught them to abide in a corrupt and murderous government. Do you think God condoned that, or do you think God could condone an insurrection that would have prevented millions upon millions of horror and death?

Well, the issue is that the "higher authority" in this nation that I am bound to is the constitution. When leaders disobey the constiution, it is THEM who are usurping a higher authority, then it is MY DUTY to obey the higher authority, which in this nation are the founding documents, and is defined as such. That is what I was ordered to protect under oath. God says do not make oaths lightly, and he means what He says. So here it is. My authority in regards to government authority is a document I am bound to protect. It is above any elected official.

So, if I am to obey in spirit and in deed..what is it.... Romans 8?....then technically I am bound to obey the highest authority of this nation. In Rome it was Nero or whatever Ceasar sat on the throne. In this country it is the constitution that is thei highest authority. I believe I am Biblically bound to obey the highest authority of the civil government, which is....the covenant of the consitution. So if I rise up against a government that disobeys it's own mandated document, then it is them who are rebelling against the instution, and I believe I am obedient to the institution by holding those usurpers accountable.

If you think that you are commanded to obey some historic government, then why not go back and obey Englandís government?

The government of today has equal authority as any previous government, so they would not be usurping their God given authority by over ruling any previous government.

I think your worship of this constitution, is something of a golden calf.

Caleb

Jun 30th 2011, 11:30 PM

Actually, it is not so silly. Bonhoffer was a passivist. Then he had a real struggle with whether or not to get involved with assasination attempts againt Hitler; but in the end, he decided that killing Hitler would save far more lives in the long run.

Then he disobeyed God.

And that is the point. There often comes a time when a person must decide whether the "government" is so far out of line that it no longer merits their support. So how many millions did the nazis kill? And how many more millions has the US killed in the name of abortion rights? At some point, the scales tip and Christians must take their proper (God-centered) stand.

Then those who voted for them share in their guilt.

keck553

Jun 30th 2011, 11:38 PM

If you think that you are commanded to obey some historic government, then why not go back and obey England’s government?

The constitution is not "some historic government." It is the document ALL elected officials area SWORN to protect and uphold. Please try and learn about the goverment in this nation so you are equipped to obey your government properly. Sorry if my bluntness is offensive, but one can not obey their governing authority properly in ignorance.

The government of today has equal authority as any previous government, so they would not be usurping their God given authority by over ruling any previous government.

Only if they abide in their sworn oath to the constitution, which is MANDATORY for ALL elected officials. Once they break their oath, all bets are off; they have also broken the second commandment and profaned the Name of the LORD. That is how this country is set up. That is the rule of law.

I think your worship of this constitution, is something of a golden calf.

I think you should attend to the log in your own eye, and allow God to judge my heart.

Warrior4God

Jun 30th 2011, 11:44 PM

The constitution is not "some historic government." It is the document ALL elected officials area SWORN to protect and uphold. Please try and learn about the goverment in this nation so you are equipped to obey your government properly. Sorry if my bluntness is offensive, but one can not obey their governing authority properly in ignorance.

Only if they abide in their sworn oath to the constitution, which is MANDATORY for ALL elected officials. Once they break their oath, all bets are off; they have also broken the second commandment and profaned the Name of the LORD. That is how this country is set up. That is the rule of law.

I think you should let God judge my heart and attend to the log in your own eye first.

This reply was PHENOMENAL. :thumbsup: I could not have said it any better...

Bandit

Jun 30th 2011, 11:47 PM

Then he disobeyed God.

Then those who voted for them share in their guilt.

So you never believe it is right to take a stand against evil?

Reynolds357

Jul 1st 2011, 02:08 AM

He does, but scripture also makes clear that if God's standards and commandments conflict with what your government says to do, God wins.

Ok. Whats your answer to abortion in the United States? Gay marriage in the United States?
The U.S. is clearly "conflicting with the standards and commandments" of God.

Reynolds357

Jul 1st 2011, 02:11 AM

If you think that you are commanded to obey some historic government, then why not go back and obey England’s government?

The government of today has equal authority as any previous government, so they would not be usurping their God given authority by over ruling any previous government.

I think your worship of this constitution, is something of a golden calf.

I really have thought for quite some time looking for a polite way to say what I am about to say. I could not come up with one, so here goes. This is about the most ignorant group of statements I have ever read in context of discussing government.

Warrior4God

Jul 1st 2011, 03:21 PM

Ok. Whats your answer to abortion in the United States? Gay marriage in the United States?
The U.S. is clearly "conflicting with the standards and commandments" of God.

I am not ok with gay marriage. I am not ok with abortion. I am not sure what you are asking of me. I don't really have an "answer" for these things. They shouldn't be happening, but they are. Unfortunately, these things are ones that the U.S government allows. If I could vote them away I would in a heart beat.

keck553

Jul 1st 2011, 04:14 PM

Ok. Whats your answer to abortion in the United States? Gay marriage in the United States?
The U.S. is clearly "conflicting with the standards and commandments" of God.

And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second, that second for a third, and so on 'til the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automations of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering

- Thomas Jefferson

Caleb

Jul 1st 2011, 09:01 PM

I really have thought for quite some time looking for a polite way to say what I am about to say. I could not come up with one, so here goes. This is about the most ignorant group of statements I have ever read in context of discussing government.

I am not one bit surprised that you think that.

Caleb

Jul 1st 2011, 09:07 PM

So you never believe it is right to take a stand against evil?

That is what I am doing in this thread.

We are told not to kill.

Caleb

Jul 1st 2011, 09:08 PM

The constitution is not "some historic government." It is the document ALL elected officials area SWORN to protect and uphold. Please try and learn about the goverment in this nation so you are equipped to obey your government properly. Sorry if my bluntness is offensive, but one can not obey their governing authority properly in ignorance.

Only if they abide in their sworn oath to the constitution, which is MANDATORY for ALL elected officials. Once they break their oath, all bets are off; they have also broken the second commandment and profaned the Name of the LORD. That is how this country is set up. That is the rule of law.

I think you should attend to the log in your own eye, and allow God to judge my heart.

I did not judge your heart, I judged your words and actions.

keck553

Jul 1st 2011, 10:34 PM

That is what I am doing in this thread.

We are told not to kill.

Incorrect.

We are told not to murder. In both Hebrew and Greek (Septuagint). Please use your concordance.

keck553

Jul 1st 2011, 10:39 PM

I did not judge your heart, I judged your words and actions.

In that case you are horribly incorrect, and your judgement is patently false.

I will pray for you.

Caleb

Jul 1st 2011, 11:31 PM

Incorrect.

We are told not to murder. In both Hebrew and Greek (Septuagint). Please use your concordance.

I will agree with that, so do not murder.

Reynolds357

Jul 2nd 2011, 02:20 AM

I am not ok with gay marriage. I am not ok with abortion. I am not sure what you are asking of me. I don't really have an "answer" for these things. They shouldn't be happening, but they are. Unfortunately, these things are ones that the U.S government allows. If I could vote them away I would in a heart beat.

Putting Jews in the gas chamber was something the Nazzi govt. allowed. Our govt. is as evil as Hitler's govt. Murder of innocent unborn children is as wrong as slaughter of Jews in the gas chambers.

Amos_with_goats

Jul 2nd 2011, 02:24 AM

Incorrect.

We are told not to murder. In both Hebrew and Greek (Septuagint). Please use your concordance.

A distinction that has for many spiders, snakes, and critters made an eternal difference.

Cornflake

Jul 2nd 2011, 02:32 AM

A distinction that has for many spiders, snakes, and critters made an eternal difference.

:lol:

...........

keck553

Jul 2nd 2011, 06:52 PM

I will agree with that, so do not murder.

It's good that you agree, because that makes your post #48 out of context and void.

keck553

Jul 2nd 2011, 06:53 PM

A distinction that has for many spiders, snakes, and critters made an eternal difference.